Has Firearms Confiscation Failed Like Cannabis Prohibition?

The amnesty period for the recent firearms confiscation in New Zealand has just ended. Early estimates suggest that fewer than half of the recently-banned firearms have been handed in, which means that some 100,000 Kiwis are now criminals. This essay asks: if the New Zealand people aren’t going to obey the new firearms law because they don’t consider it legitimate, is enforcing it even feasible?

No people are obliged to obey immoral laws.

Intuitive recognition of this natural law of morality is why cannabis prohibition has failed in New Zealand. The people of New Zealand feel that they have the inherent right to use cannabis, and therefore they don’t care about the manmade laws prohibiting it. The people who follow and enforce these laws, not the ones that break them, are the ones who shall incur the karmic debt.

This widespread refusal to submit to cannabis prohibition has made the law unenforceable. Not only do Kiwis continue to use cannabis, but they regularly collaborate to help each other evade law enforcement. Although people getting ratted out for cannabis offences is still very common, it’s not routine like it is for offences that actually harm people. So for every cannabis user arrested, a hundred more people become cannabis users.

In a system such as ours, our politicians are supposed to be representatives of the public will. Therefore, the New Zealand people feel that politicians who do not follow the public will are acting in bad faith, and that these politicians do not need to be respected. Overseas, such sentiments regularly lead to violence and civil unrest. Consequently, our politicians try to make sure that they’re seen respecting the public will.

This is part of the unwritten contract that prevents we, the people, from killing them. We have the right to kill anyone trying to enslave us, as per the Iron Tenet of anarcho-homicidalism, and anyone refusing to accept our legitimate will is trying to enslave us. The ruling class understand this, which is why they are now giving way on the question of cannabis prohibition.

The problem is that it’s starting to look as if the public will is against the new firearms prohibitions. The New Zealand Council of Licenced Firearms Owners estimates that, although some 56,000 weapons have been surrendered, there are still 100,000 that have not been. There are also suggestions that, of the 56,000 rifles surrendered, many were effectively useless anyway.

The question raised by the refusal to hand in the now-prohibited firearms is this: if the New Zealand people refuse to submit to the new firearms prohibitions, are these laws any more enforceable than the cannabis laws? In other words, is it possible that widespread defiance of the new firearms prohibitions could lead to their withdrawal in the future?

There are already counter-movements to the firearms crackdowns.

The New Conservatives have promised to repeal the recent changes to the firearms laws. VJM Publishing has declared the ownership of weapons to be an inherent human right granted by God, as part of the Sevenfold Conception of Human Rights. Predictably, a large proportion of rural dwellers are against tightening firearms prohibition, with many having stashed weapons away.

There is one major difference between the cannabis laws and the firearms laws. It’s much harder to prohibit something that grows in the ground from a seed than it is to prohibit precision instruments that have to be manufactured overseas in a dedicated factory and then imported.

The New Zealand Police might calculate, therefore, that if they smash a few Kiwis in high-profile firearms raids, and co-ordinate this with a mainstream media propaganda campaign calling the targets “white supremacists,” the remainder will submit.

After all, it took ninety years of utter futility, wasting billions of dollars and many millions of manhours, before it was admitted that cannabis prohibition was a failure. So there’s no reason to think that the New Zealand ruling class will lightly give up their ambitions to render the population harmless through firearms prohibition. Even if it has failed, they will not readily admit it.

Ultimately, it doesn’t matter what laws are forced on us by our ruling classes. The Police will attack any Kiwi that the ruling class tells them to attack, but if repeated attacks don’t change the people’s behaviour, then there’s good reason to think that it won’t ever change. This has already been proven true with the failed attempts to prohibit homosexuality, prostitution and cannabis use.

The next few years will see a battle between the will of the ruling class, expressed through the actions of the New Zealand Police, and the will of the Kiwi nation who will be targeted by those actions. If the New Zealand people utterly refuse to co-operate with the new firearms prohibitions, then the ruling class might be forced to concede that those prohibitions are unenforceable.

If you enjoyed reading this essay, you can get a compilation of the Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2018 from Amazon for Kindle or Amazon for CreateSpace (for international readers), or TradeMe (for Kiwis). A compilation of the Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2017 is also available.

If you would like to support our work in other ways, please consider subscribing to our SubscribeStar fund.

Clown World Chronicles: What Is ‘The Muttening’?

The eschatology of Clown World encompasses a number of endgame scenarios. One is “The Great Awakening,” where the entire world rises into a higher spiritual dimension. Another is “The Boogaloo,” an orgy of violence that redefines the world order. Another, as this chapter will examine, is called “The Muttening.”

Everyone is aware that ethnic diversity is increasing in all Western nations. This is primarily because our ruling classes, beholden to international banking and finance interests, keep the immigration taps open to pump up house prices and to press down wages. They do this with the full support of those they have brainwashed into thinking that opposing immigration is racism.

But this diversity has both benefits and drawbacks.

Among the benefits are an increased richness of life, primarily manifested in an increased variety of food, music and other cultural expressions. It has become possible to meet people from a large variety of different cultures and to hear about their different perspectives on life, politics, religion and philosophy. It’s also been possible to shag some of them.

The drawbacks are harder to talk about. This is partly because they are less obvious, but also because they are taboo. As mentioned above, the population at large has been conditioned to believe that opposing the mass immigration of cheap labour is racism. Many have even come to believe that pointing out any difference at all between two human groups is racism.

This has led to a number of probably unforeseen outcomes.

The reason why this rapid increase in ethnic diversity is called “The Muttening” and not something positive is for the same reason that a mongrel dog is called a mutt and not something positive. The depressing reality is that diversity destroys nations, a consequence of the fact that it makes it harder for the average citizen to relate to others. This is proven by science.

Scientific research shows a negative relationship between ethnic diversity and social trust. The greater the ethnic diversity of an area, the less people trust their neighbours. This has serious consequences for the viability of a country, because the less trust in a society the harder it is to govern. Less trusting people are less accepting of things that go against them and tend to fight and argue more.

This is why there is an association between increased diversity and lowered economic performance. Commerce is dependent on trust – for a modern economy to function, customers have to be confident that they’re buying quality goods and services, and not rubbish designed to rip them off. When trust dries up, the wheels of commerce have trouble turning.

Ultimately, as was argued in this paper, “…when diversity is low in a society and people feel close to their fellow citizens, they can identify with one another and are hence more likely to trust one another.” In other words, diversity makes every society shittier and generally less pleasant to live in. Diversity brings poverty and rage in its wake.

Another consequence of this sudden increase in diversity has been challenges of personal identity. As mentioned above, one of the results of diversity has been an increase in interracial marriage. Naturally, this leads to an increase in the number of mixed-race people.

Many of these mixed-race people find it difficult to assume a coherent identity. Often they are accepted by neither of their parent’s groups. Men like Barack Obama are simultaneously too white to be accepted by other blacks and too black to be accepted by other whites. Obama managed to find a place in the world as an American, but many others live as ghosts, between two worlds.

Some earnest do-gooders have concluded that, if all of the different races in the world would mix together, there would no longer be any ethnic conflict. These people have never seen the state of Brazil. Consequently, these people agitate on the side of the international bankers and finance interests to destroy borders, ostensibly in the belief that to do so would help the “global working class”.

This process of extreme race-mixing at both the individual and group level is known as The Muttening. The reduction of all the vibrant cultures of the world into one homogenised mass of consumer whores. A Starbucks, a McDonalds and an Apple store on every corner, and their patrons interchangeable with the patrons of any other large city. No-one knowing their neighbours, but everyone knowing the latest consumer fashion.

It’s not clear how far The Muttening will go. The entire Western World may end up like Brazil and South Africa, or we may end up with a pan-Western Hitler figure who puts a stop to it all. It may trigger the Boogaloo, or it may trigger the aliens coming to Earth and accepting us into the Galactic Confederation. In any case – the longer it continues, the more fragile Clown World becomes.

This article is an excerpt from Clown World Chronicles, a book about the insanity of life in the post-Industrial West. This is being compiled by Vince McLeod for an expected release in the middle of 2020.

If you would like to support our work in other ways, please consider subscribing to our SubscribeStar fund.

Young People Voting For Left-Wing Parties Is Not Evidence Of Marxist Brainwashing Camps

A popular meme going around at the moment shows an electoral map of Britain if only 18-24 year olds had voted in the General Election earlier this month. The map is almost completely red, leading many to conclude that these young people have all been brainwashed into voting Labour, but this conclusion does not follow evidentially. Demographer Dan McGlashan, author of Understanding New Zealand, explains.

Most adults are intelligent enough to know that people don’t cast their votes depending on which set of policies best serve the nation, or even depending on which set of politicians appears to be the most competent. The reality is that politics is pure, naked self-interest, and people cast their vote based on that.

One of the basic rules of democratic elections is that the less resources a person controls, the more they will want resources to be redistributed. This isn’t merely a law of politics, or even a law of psychology, but a law of ethology, brought about by evolution.

It can be observed in primate troops that the primates with the weakest capacity for gathering resources from nature are the same ones that are the most strongly in favour of sharing. This is not surprising, because the weaker one’s capacity for gathering resources, the more reliant one becomes on the gathering capacity of others.

When a person is aged between 18 and 24, it’s almost inevitable that they are poor, at least as an individual. At the absolute most they will have earned a postgraduate degree, and even if they managed to avoid a student loan they will not have had enough time to earn any real money. Assuming they haven’t inherited a fortune already, the best of them will be working an entry-level position and renting, with little real savings.

People in this age bracket find that it’s older people who own everything already. In New Zealand, the correlation between living in a freehold house and being aged between 20 and 29 was -0.60. If one considers that many people in this age bracket will be living in a freehold house owned by a family member, it suggests that very few of them will own their own homes.

Not owning your own home means that you will get extorted out of rent money in order to not die of exposure. Because it’s the old who own most of the homes, society is therefore structured in a way that funnels wealth away from the young workers and into the pockets of the old owners. Because society is set up this way, young people are always likely to vote for the party that promises to give workers a bigger share.

This is no more surprising or immoral than the old voting to not redistribute wealth owing to the fact that they already own everything. Voting for a Conservative party is the same as voting to uphold the Police and their enforcement of property claims, and this is almost always done when a person charges rent. In other words, it’s also voting purely in one’s self-interest.

Further evidence for the statement that young people don’t vote for left-wing parties because of Marxist indoctrination comes from observing young university students. Young people who go to university are more likely to vote for a right-wing party than those who did not go to university. If young people voted for left-wing parties because of Marxist brainwashing camps, then those not exposed to the camps would vote for right-wing parties more often.

The opposite is the case. This is because young people who go to university are more likely to come from the middle class than those who do not, and are therefore wealthier than the average of their age cohort, despite that their age cohort is relatively poor. Consequently, they are more likely to vote Conservative out of self-interest.

On the other hand, it is true that our university system has been reduced to a network of Marxist indoctrination camps. Evidence for this doesn’t come from the voting patterns of young people, though – it comes from the movements against free speech, the promulgation of anti-white philosophies and the distorted views of history and of human nature that are promoted for political reasons and not because of a love of truth.

The voting pattern of young people voting for left-wing parties that promise to redistribute wealth is not because these young people have been brainwashed – it’s because they’re poor. The kind of low-IQ person susceptible to Marxist brainwashing would usually vote left anyway on account of that they were poor.

Understanding New Zealand, by Dan McGlashan and published by VJM Publishing, is the comprehensive guide to the demographics and voting patterns of the New Zealand people. It is available on TradeMe (for Kiwis) and on Amazon (for international readers).

If you would like to support our work in other ways, please consider subscribing to our SubscribeStar fund.

Clown World Chronicles: What is ‘Pozzed’?

Of the variety of insults and jibes in the vocabulary of Clown World, many of them relate to sexual conduct. This is true of all times and places in human history, but Clown World slang has moved past calling people ‘fags’ and ‘wankers’. In Clown World culture there’s an entirely new vocabulary to describe the environmental phenomena around us – and one of those words is ‘pozzed’.

A common Clown World insult is to say that someone or something has AIDS. People with AIDS are typically sickly and weak on account of immune system failure. So if a disfavoured person looks less than healthy, someone else might say that they have AIDS.

AIDS is what you get if you have the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV). If you do contract HIV, and then undergo a test for it, you will be found positive. It’s from this use of ‘positive’ that the word ‘pozzed’ is derived.

In practice, there’s little difference between a place that has been pozzed and a place that has been heavily influenced by globohomo. Globohomo makes cities and nations sickly and weak, much like AIDS does. A city or nation that has been heavily influenced by globohomo can be said to be pozzed.

‘Pozzed’ is another way of saying ‘takes it up the arse’. The assumption is that a place that is pozzed will have, among other things, a large amount of homosexual activity, some of it non-consensual. The statement “San Francisco is completely pozzed” suggests that a large number of people contract AIDS there. It implies that a large number of people in San Francisco get fucked in the arse by strangers with no contraceptives.

There’s more to it than that, of course – somewhere pozzed will also suffer from physical deterioration and social decay. It will probably have large numbers of homeless people and refugees wandering the streets during the day. It will be common to see open drug use, open urination and even open defecation. A place that is pozzed enough might even have open fornication.

When it is said that “The West is pozzed,” it’s meant that the West is sickly and weak. Like an AIDS victim, the West is just shuffling along towards its deathbed, nothing left to hope for except that death will be as painless as possible. The West has taken it up the arse so hard and for so long, that’s it’s now a testing bed for weapons-grade AIDS.

People who say that the West is pozzed will point to various signs of social decay. The fact that it’s all but impossible to own a house and to raise a family on one worker’s wage. The destruction of social cohesion brought about by mass immigration and cultural atomisation. The rise of transfaggotry and the decline of two-parent households. The reduction of our media and cultural institutions to the lowest common denominator.

The broader implication is that a pozzed place is one that is godless. Much like the men in San Francisco bathhouses, the average citizen of Clown World lives only for the next animal pleasure. Clown World has fallen so far from righteousness that people don’t even care if they contract AIDS and die. Phenomena such as bugchasing underline the fact that we have turned our backs on God.

Much like AIDS, there is no cure for being pozzed. The only course of treatment is to let the pozzed body die and then to replace it with a healthy one. Unfortunately, this is the path that every pozzed workplace, city or nation will have to undergo. The West will undergo it in a decade or so.

If one places Clown World in the Five Regimes model described by Plato in The Republic, we have just moved past democracy and are just starting to move into tyranny. This means that there is now a moral obligation on us to overthrow this corrupt and rotten system, and to replace it with one that works to minimise human suffering, instead of one that works to aggravate it.

If you would like to support our work in other ways, please consider subscribing to our SubscribeStar fund.